First lie about Palin: She dissed the VP job

posted at 2:25 pm on August 29, 2008 by Allahpundit

Well, no, she didn’t, and I should know: I’m the one who uploaded the YouTube clip back in June that people are circulating today as evidence. Politico accuses her of “distaste for the office” but at least provides the full quote of what she said; Taegan Goddard, who was last seen hyperventilating over Obama’s speech, goes the full Think Progress route and excises the part that proves the lie. Skip ahead to 2:50:

“[A]s for that VP talk all the time, I’ll tell you, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me what is it exactly that the VP does every day? I’m used to being very productive and working real hard in an administration. We want to make sure that that VP slot would be a fruitful type of position, especially for Alaskans and for the things that we’re trying to accomplish up here for the rest of the U.S. before I can even start addressing that question.”

She’s making a point that should appeal to feminists especially: It’s not that she has distaste for the job, it’s that she’d have distaste for the job if it meant nothing more than serving as window dressing for McCain. A job with “fruitful,” meaningful responsibilities, especially with respect to energy policy, is a different ballgame. Stand by for plenty of distortions of what she actually said, though, starting no doubt with the “Worst Person in the World Segment” of tonight’s episode of “Keith’s Enemies List.”

Update: CNN picks it up, but at least provides the full quote. Note the transcription of her speech as “I tell ya” instead of “I tell you.”

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Looks like they’re trying to brand her as quickly as possible in the media. Every article I’ve read casually mentions that she’s “under investigation for firing a state trooper” or some variation on the theme which is not at all what happened.

Upinak (or anyone that remembers):

I believe you sent some links a while back with some great information regarding the so-called ‘trooper-gate’ scandal. I read through them, but, didn’t bookmark them at the time because I didn’t think there was any chance that Palin would be selected.

Now, she’s the nominee and I’m starting to hear a bunch of people (who didn’t even know who Sarah was until this morning) talk about the scandal as if it’s something HUGE.

I’d like to be able to effectively discuss the situation with them, but, need more information. Can you (or anyone else that happens to have them) repost those links?

Trying to call a current governor and former mayor “inexperienced” compared to a first term senator reeks of Liberal desperation. The Messiah’s shills attempts to paint an executive as inexperienced are laughable.

The Left is worried. Very worried. They’re already slipping back to pushing the Barack elitism which completely crashed his Brandenburg Gate flop.

The governor of a state…any state, is consitutionally responsible to administer the executive office of state government…is consitutionally required to establish the state budget, is consitutionally required to be commander of the National Guard not called into federal service and state militia, (if one exists)…is constitutionally required to appoint the heads of various state agencies from a secretary of public safety to the boards of visitors of various state universities & colleges…is constituionally required to appoint, in most states, judges to serve on the lowest state courts to the state supreme court…recommend various legislation to implement and support state programs…to ensure that federal mandates to the states are implemented…may veto bills from the legislature…may call the legislature into special session. There’s more but this is long enough. Experience? No…Palin doesn’t have any experience. But Obama, the political shill for the Daley Machine in Chicago and a PART-TIME US senator is ready to step into the White House on day one.

It’s really a small thing, but seeing how small things are the big things of this election; Palin does make mention of “the U.S.” She uses the term, instead of ‘the Nation,’ or ‘America,’ as if there is a certain detachment between her, Alaska, and “the rest of the U.S.”

It’s something she’s going to have to stop doing before it catches on as lexicon.

The Left is worried. Very worried. They’re already slipping back to pushing the Barack elitism which completely crashed his Brandenburg Gate flop.

viking01 on August 29, 2008 at 4:01 PM

Yup, I’ve already read that she was too pedestrian for such a high office. Maybe she needs more houses? It way too much fun watching the liberals meltdown because of her being picked. It always bites them doesn’t it? First it was Bush didn’t have enough military experience because their pick was in Nam. Then the military experience didn’t matter and maybe a hindrance because their guy didn’t have any. Then it was experience was overrated and now it’s essential. Only the rich elitist seeks the office and our pick is not one of them and now all of a sudden the common hockey mom is no good and what you need is an elitist. Oh don’t forget Bush and do you want someone that has done coke in office? Sure you do if it’s a liberal.

It’s really a small thing, but seeing how small things are the big things of this election; Palin does make mention of “the U.S.” She uses the term, instead of ‘the Nation,’ or ‘America,’ as if there is a certain detachment between her, Alaska, and “the rest of the U.S.”

It’s something she’s going to have to stop doing before it catches on as lexicon.

PresidenToor on August 29, 2008 at 4:43 PM

Why?
Which America? North, central or South? Is Canada part of America? What Nation is that? The Nation of France? How about the Nation of England?

What I’m saying is that saying the US, I generally say USA, is pretty specific in a United States kind of way.
Besides do you really think someone would not vote for her because she says US rather than America?

“Besides do you really think someone would not vote for her because she says US rather than America?”

First of all, Allah has already pointed to Goldberg’s piece as something to “pay particular attention too,” regarding Palin’s parochialism. And yes, the guy in Georgia is going to wonder why she keeps talking about Alaska contributing to the U.S. as if his state of Georgia is somehow not contributing to the U.S. I mean how do the 900,000 people in Montana contribute to the U.S.? Is the measure of a state the contribution it provides to the greater whole? What does Alaska have to do with down home issues in Ohio?

My sense is that Palin tends to say “US” in the way an executive like a Governor would say it, in a practical manner as befits her constitutional responsibilties, state vs federal, rather than “our nation” or even “America” which tends to be the language of politicians. So, while I agree she may have to make her speech more political, she isn’t doing too bad at the fundraising part, is she?